3 Specific Learning Disabilities Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts Superintendent Jorea M. Marple, Ed.D. Some information in this document was adapted from Support for Personalized Learning Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts (April 2012); West Virginia Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities (March 2009); Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities (Colorado 2008); Specific Learning Disability Identification: A Guide for Teams to Determine SLD Eligibility (Thompson School District 2009). Notes: This guidance document is available at and This guidance document incorporates and replaces the Department s technical assistance manual, West Virginia Guidelines for Identifying Students with Specific Learning Disabilities Additional guidance on eligibility for specific learning disabilities may be found in Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities July Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts i

7 Foreword The reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA) allowed states to use a multi-level instructional framework as one method in determining eligibility for specific learning disabilities (SLD). West Virginia was one of the first states to adopt and implement this method of identification in all elementary schools. This method enables students to engage in multiple levels of instruction prior to determining a specific learning disability is present. Since this adoption, the number of students identified with specific learning disabilities has shown a gradual decrease. In 2011, the multi-level instructional framework for all students was redefined as Support for Personalized Learning (SPL) This framework allows customization of instruction for all students in West Virginia at the elementary and secondary levels. The 2012 revisions to Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities outline the suggested guidelines for using SPL to determine if a student exhibits a specific learning disability. These revisions of Policy 2419 include an alternate approach for determining specific learning disabilities known as patterns of strengths and weaknesses. This approach involves comprehensive cross-battery assessments which diagnose areas of need when a student is not responding to instruction and the cause is unknown. By using cross-battery assessments and data from high quality instruction provided within the SPL framework, districts and schools can be certain of their eligibility decisions regarding students with specific learning disabilities. The purpose of this document is to provide a resource for districts and schools and to give guidance with the regulations in determining eligibility for specific learning disabilities. The West Virginia Department of Education supports the excellent work of professionals in our state and recognizes their commitment to the students and schools they serve. Jorea M. Marple, Ed.D. State Superintendent of Schools Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts v

8 vi Specific Learning Disabilities

9 Introduction In 2004, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA 2004) permitted the use of a process for identification of students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) that is based on the child s response to scientific, research-based intervention ( (a)(2)). This reauthorization of IDEA also permitted, but did not require, the use of what has come to be known as the third method approach ( (a)(2)(ii). This approach involves consideration of a pattern of strengths or weaknesses, or both, relative to intellectual development and achievement if the evaluation group considers such information relevant to the identification of SLD. In 2007 the West Virginia Board of Education approved a revision to Policy 2419: Regulations for the Education of Students with Exceptionalities that phased out the use of the severe discrepancy model and required the use of Response to Intervention (RTI) documentation as one component of eligibility decision-making while also recognizing the contribution that an evaluation of a student s cognitive processing to determine strengths and weaknesses could be very valuable. In 2011, Support for Personalized Learning (SPL) was adopted as a framework for providing personalized learning to all students. The West Virginia SPL framework is a state-wide initiative that suggests flexible use of resources to provide relevant academic, social/emotional and/or behavioral support to enhance learning for all students. SPL is characterized by a seamless system of high-quality instructional practices allowing all students to sustain significant progress, whether they are considered at-risk, exceeding grade-level expectations or at any point along the continuum. The IDEA encourages utilizing RTI as one means of identifying students for special education services. RTI has been a part of WV schools since 2005 and it is included in the overall approach to SPL. However, the intent of SPL is much more pervasive than eligibility alone. SPL utilizes instructional approaches such as universal screening and on-going data analysis to inform instruction, facilitate flexible use of building personnel, and encourage collaborative problem-solving to enhance the performance of ALL students. The flexibility of the framework allows schools to customize their implementation of SPL. Data collection indicates the most successful sites use common SPL components in a systematic way. Utilizing SPL in West Virginia to identify Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) One of the ways SPL supports student learning is by addressing the prevention of academic, social/emotional and behavioral difficulties through the establishment of a multi-level instruction framework. High-quality practices supported by the multi-level SPL framework include accommodating the needs of all students resulting in improved support for struggling and high-achieving students; a means for appropriately identifying and selecting students for continued services through an Individualized Education Program (IEP) based on their demonstrated response to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction; universal screening for all students in core academic areas; multi-levels that provide increasing support for students who struggle; systematic data collection, analysis and decision-making; progressively intense monitoring of student achievement; collaboration and problem-solving; professional development for teachers and administrators in all components of the framework. SPL is one component of the identification of SLD. A SLD determination is based on both educational need and a student s low response to high-quality general education instruction. A body of evidence demonstrating academic skill deficiencies and insufficient progress when provided TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction is required in documenting eligibility as a student with a SLD. It is critical that teachers, administrators and evaluators understand that low achievement alone does not constitute a student with a learning disability. It is only after a student is provided appropriate supplemental TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction over a sufficient period of time that the conclusion of a SLD may be made. The delivery of sufficient and appropriate multi-level instruction includes Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 1

10 the provision of supports at CORE, TARGETED and INTENSIVE levels. Instruction at these increasingly more intense levels ensures that each student is provided an adequate opportunity to learn prior to a SLD determination. Connecting the SPL Framework to SLD Determination SPL provides a framework for working with struggling learners and allows general education teachers to organize and deliver instruction to support students who struggle in reading, writing and mathematics. SPL supports and extends earlier models of RTI while also focusing on early intervention in the area of behavior. The benefit of SPL is to provide early intervention and to reduce the number of students referred for special education services; ultimately distinguishing between poorly performing students with disabilities and students performing poorly due to inadequate instruction. The SPL process may be used to identify specific and effective instructional strategies that result in higher student achievement. Many students who struggle to master grade-level content often benefit from instruction that is skill specific and supplemental to the instruction provided within the general curriculum. Given supplemental instruction, progress can be accelerated by adequate time, the use of effective materials and robust instruction. Consequently, many students no longer require additional instruction. However, for a small number of students, low levels of response to instruction might initiate a referral for special education. Implementation of the SPL framework is a process for verifying students have had access to high-quality instruction prior to pursuing eligibility. Labeling a child is never a benign action. Eligibility decisions hold life-changing implications for students and should be made with thorough attention to all aspects of the process. The performance of students with disabilities is considerably different from their same-grade peers on core academic skills such as English/language arts or mathematics. Historically, defining SLD and determining their presence has been difficult and complex due to attempts to define what it is not rather than what it is. Moreover, the definition remained relatively unchanged since its inception in the early 1960s. IDEA and Policy 2419 define a SLD as: a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell, or to do mathematical calculation, including conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia. The identification of SLD requires a comprehensive and strategic investigation of factors that might account for a student s underachievement. A learning disability does not include learning problems that are primarily a result of visual, hearing or motor disabilities, intellectual disability or emotional/behavioral disorders. Similarly, a learning disability must not be identified when environmental, cultural or economic disadvantage is a primary contributing factor to low academic performance. If any of these areas are suspected to be the primary cause of a student s underachievement, the Student Assistance Team (SAT) should be convened to review data and make recommendations for appropriate instruction within the context of general education. Traditionally, SLD has been defined and identified as unexpected underachievement as measured by a discrepancy between cognitive ability and achievement. The method of measuring such discrepancies has proven problematic and ineffective (Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & Barnes, 2007). Fuchs, Fuchs, & Speece (2002) note that research documents similar learning profiles (i.e., severe underachievement) in children with and without IQ-achievement discrepancies. Moreover, the wait-to-fail method, as it is often characterized in the literature, is no longer an acceptable option for identifying SLD. 2 Specific Learning Disabilities

11 Severe and persistent low achievement Minimal or low response to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction Consideration of exclusionary factors, including lack of appropriate instruction SLD Determination Today, it is important to think about a student with a SLD as demonstrating a substantially lower learning rate manifested by unresponsiveness to instruction and intervention (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Speece, 2002). This constitutes a shift in thinking and requires school personnel to reassess their attitudes and beliefs about students who experience persistent academic difficulties. The student with a SLD may be characterized as a learner with extreme low achievement and limited positive response to appropriate instruction (Shinn, 2007; Fletcher, 2008). Students are eligible for special education and related services when it is determined that they differ substantially from their peers on both of these dimensions. That is, they demonstrate low academic performance and inadequate growth (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Speece, 2002). While SPL uses a variety of terms to describe a student s underachievement (e.g., significant, substantial, severe), the premise is that the achievement of these students is markedly different from peers, is significantly below grade-level expectations and interferes with progress in the general curriculum unless special education services are provided. An integrated approach to SLD determination, a combination of SPL/RTI and the Pattern of Strengths and Weaknesses (PSW) model, may be advantageous because it hypothesizes a link between the observed low academic performance/ inadequate growth and the responsible cognitive processing weaknesses. In an integrated or hybrid approach to SLD determination it is important to first document the provision of relevant scientifically-based core curricula and high-quality instruction. The description of the learner s response to this learning environment is then paired with assessment and used to help determine why the student was not responsive to this instruction. When PSW is included as part of the comprehensive SLD evaluation the cognitive process (es) that are interfering with a student s ability to perform academically may be identified. This identification is important because it may establish links between specific cognitive processes and academic areas of concern. These links have the potential to subsequently guide supplemental instruction and/or specially designed instruction. Although the processing deficits may or may not be remediable, their identification could lead to more effective instructional and compensatory strategies for those students who have not responded adequately to INTENSIVE levels of instruction within the SPL approach. It is hoped that an integrated approach may ensure that when greater intensity of instruction is not successful eligible students will receive individualized instruction based on their unique patterns of both academic and cognitive processing strengths and weaknesses. Appendix A comprehensively defines the eight areas of SLD and provides resources for each area. Emphasis on eligibility decision-making moves from quantifying the discrepancy between IQ and achievement to Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 3

12 analyzing whether or not a student is responding adequately to supplemental instruction matched to specific needs and perhaps developing a rationale for those students whose learning difficulties persist. SPL assumes a broader view of learning disabilities based on on-going assessment and analyses of students responses over time to TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction. Instructional implications of assessment, particularly progress monitoring results, are critical and play an essential role in making the eligibility decision. Parents as Partners in the Process When parents and schools work collaboratively, student outcomes improve. The SPL framework provides an opportunity for parents and teachers to work collaboratively toward ensuring student success. SPL has initiated a significant change in the way instruction and supports are delivered. Universal screening, progress monitoring and grouping students for specific instruction are important instructional processes that parents must understand. Particularly when a child begins to struggle, schools should inform parents of the support options available within the SPL framework. When parents are fully informed they can engage in problem-solving with teachers and also support and encourage their child s academic progress at home. For the small number of students whose response to appropriate instruction may be described as low or minimal, teachers and parents may begin to suspect a SLD. Policy 2419 includes the following parental notification requirements in relation to the SPL process. The district must document that the student s parents were notified about the following: 1. The state s policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data that would be collected and the general education services that would be provided 2. Strategies for increasing the student s rate of learning 3. The parents right to request an evaluation at any time The state s policies regarding the amount and nature of student performance data requirement may be met through the dissemination of A Parent s Guide to Support for Personalized Learning (SPL) which is available at wvde.state.wv.us/spl/familycommunity.html. The brochure provides an overview of the SPL process and the multilevel instructional model and gives parents an explanation of the relationship between SPL and special education. It also informs parents of their right to request an evaluation for special education at any time. It is recommended that all parents receive a copy of the brochure at the beginning of each school year. It is particularly important that parents be involved in the decision-making processes related to providing TARGETED and INTENSIVE instruction. When parents know the type and format of instruction, they are better prepared to support their child s learning needs at home. 4 Specific Learning Disabilities

13 The Multi-Level Instructional Model The multi-level instructional model provides a framework for the delivery of increasingly more intense academic support. The model is preventative in nature and assumes that most children s academic difficulties can be addressed with additional instructional supports provided within the context of general education. A few students need INTENSIVE support in addition to the CORE instruction to learn. Some students need intermittent additional support in addition to quality CORE instruction. The majority of students respond to highquality, standards-based CORE instruction that is differentiated and delivered with relevant scaffolding. 5% 15% 80% INTENSIVE TARGETED CORE CORE High-quality CORE instruction is the foundation of SPL. It is characterized by high expectations for all students and takes place in an academic environment that is safe, challenging, engaging and allows students to take academic risks without fear of failure. All students need access to high-quality CORE instruction. Quality instruction at the CORE level requires a focus of personnel and resources as indicated by students needs. Due to the fluctuating nature of needs across and within districts, schools and classrooms, it is essential that the individuals who are most aware of the needs participate in decisions made to allocate personnel and material resources. SPL affirms the premise that high-quality CORE instruction averts the need for unnecessary intervention and supports, and meets the needs of at least 80% of the students. Quality instruction at the CORE level incorporates relevant formative assessment, differentiation and scaffolding as basic practices in all lessons, and provides significant opportunities for authentic application of content and skills in and across all disciplines. It requires responsive teaching, teacher modeling, guided instruction, productive group work and independent learning. Content goals in the CORE come directly from the West Virginia Content Standards and Objectives. Assessment is an important component of CORE instruction, as well. A variety of assessments are used to guide instruction. SPL supports the need for all schools to have a process for reviewing all students progress through district-level and building-level screening. The WV SPL framework suggests some type of universal screening for all students at the beginning of the school year to determine each student s current level of performance. Screening measures are diverse, brief, can be informal and provide an initial indication of which students are entering the school year at-risk for academic difficulties. Valid and reliable screenings can help teachers differentiate their instruction based on what students already know and can do. Teachers, administrators and building teams reviewing screening and progress monitoring data utilize a systematic process of discussing data so that effective adjustments to instruction can be made. Careful consideration should be given to determining the root cause(s) of a student s deficit and designing instruction to align with the type of need. There are many assessments and diagnostic tools available and of value, but classroom formative assessment processes allow teachers to adjust classroom instruction by scaffolding immediately to meet students needs. The relevancy of the data used to guide instruction and scaffolding is a key consideration. Formative assessment strategies such as observations, checklists, rubrics, student work samples and student selfassessments furnish the teacher with valuable information and data, resulting in improved educational experiences for the student. SPL supports the use of performance tasks within instruction and as a means of demonstrating mastery of concepts and skills. Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 5

14 During CORE instruction, the level of performance (i.e., average score) and rate of progress of the entire class should first be evaluated to determine whether the curriculum and instructional practices are effective. If not, changes in class-wide instruction should be undertaken. Assuming that the level of performance and rate of growth of the entire class are adequate, the performance of students whose scores are discrepant from expected levels should be examined to determine whether strategic monitoring is desirable or whether TARGETED instruction should be initiated. TARGETED instruction is recommended for students whose universal screening, interim assessments, and/ or formative/classroom assessments scores fall at or below the 8th percentile, while strategic monitoring (using the same measures) is recommended for students whose scores on universal screening measures fall at the borderline level (i.e., 10th-25th percentile). On-going progress monitoring can reveal whether individual students are displaying adequate rates of growth; if growth rates are inadequate, TARGETED instruction should be initiated. Without effective instruction, discrepant growth rates will continue, resulting in the ever-increasing gap between typical and struggling learners known as Matthew Effect. TARGETED TARGETED instruction and more intense scaffolding are triggered when a student s progress in the general classroom environment, despite strong commitment and high-quality instruction at the CORE level, slows to below State-approved grade-level standards. It differs from quality CORE instruction because of increased scaffolding, time, assessment and expertise. In the TARGETED level, students receive instruction on the currently-adopted content standards and objectives. As with CORE instruction, all TARGETED lessons incorporate the principles of differentiated instruction. TARGETED instruction typically occurs within the general classroom environment. SPL supports the assumption that TARGETED instruction and scaffolding occurs using relevant content, including science, mathematics, English Language Arts (ELA), social studies and electives, including Career and Technical Education (CTE) and arts courses. SPL supports the occurrence of TARGETED instruction before, during and after school and the need for ongoing consideration of how resources are used to support extended school day and year. It is not considered appropriate for supplemental instruction to take place during lunch, recess, extracurricular activities or replace other courses such as art, music, science, social studies or any other curricular offerings. Collaboration is a key component to making TARGETED instruction effective and meaningful. For TARGETED instruction, the teacher creates flexible small groups of similarly-skilled/needs-alike students, allowing the teacher to give increased attention to each student, and to provide feedback and scaffolding within the context of collaborative peer learning experiences. Technology is embedded in teaching and learning, but is not used to replace the teacher or authentic, relevant instruction. TARGETED instruction supplements CORE instruction and usually occurs three to five times per week for 15 to 30 minutes (over a minimum of nine weeks). Those qualified to teach at the TARGETED level include classroom teachers, interventionists, instructional coaches, Title I teachers, reading specialists, related service providers and other qualified content area professionals. During the active phase of a lesson, the teacher provides TARGETED instruction by working with guided groups in a variety of ways. TARGETED instruction might mean simply meeting with the group for additional time during rotation. In small group guided instruction, content, process and/or product are differentiated to meet the learning goals of the students. In designing TARGETED support, it is also important that careful consideration be given to determine if a student can t do or won t do, since the instruction is very different. Students who do not respond to TARGETED instruction in the CORE classroom are assessed more frequently in order to gauge the effectiveness of instruction and to inform adjustment of the instruction provided. TARGETED instruction may include accommodations. These accommodations would not be expected to affect what students learn, only how they learn it. TARGETED instruction uses formative assessment processes for continuous feedback between student and teacher, peer interaction to scaffold student understanding, explicit instruction that emphasizes skill building and contextualized instruction that emphasizes application of skills. Teachers differentiate, 6 Specific Learning Disabilities

15 scaffold and use multi-modal strategies to engage students during TARGETED instruction. This is not the place for worksheet or textbook driven, drill and kill instruction. Assessment at the TARGETED level is more focused. It is based on specific students needs, and results of the assessment and collaborative decisions about the most appropriate instruction. Once TARGETED instruction is in place, student response to instruction is monitored on a regular basis (i.e. every two to three weeks). If needs are difficult to identify, a diagnostic assessment (whether formal or informal) may be necessary to determine the focus of the instruction. Appendix B and C provides a list of diagnostic assessments grouped according to skill deficit. When selecting assessments at the TARGETED level, the focus is on identifying the specific understandings and/or skills needing support and on discerning the most effective means for meeting a student s needs. Discussions about student progress at the TARGETED level may or may not take place formally in problem-solving team meetings, based on a student s progress. Informal consideration and reflection occur as an ongoing process. Teachers document TARGETED instruction matched to specific student needs as part of the process of determining what is most effective. A process called Gap Analysis can be used to determine if or how a student is responding to TARGETED instruction. Gap Analysis will also determine how intense the instruction should be. Appendix D provides a Gap Analysis Worksheet that has two steps that will help determine if there is a significant gap between a student s current performance and the expected performance and the number of weeks needed to meet the student s goal. TARGETED instruction continues until student needs can be met exclusively by CORE instruction or a team decision is made to move to INTENSIVE level support. Therefore, the duration of TARGETED instruction will vary. Insufficient progress despite sustained, relevant, high-quality instruction may warrant the initiation of INTENSIVE level support. Decisions to increase the level of support are made through data-driven dialogue conducted by the problem-solving team. Data derived from a single assessment is not considered adequate evidence for recommending INTENSIVE level support. The assessment system should be balanced by type and needs to vary from student to student. INTENSIVE INTENSIVE support is triggered when a student s progress in the general educational environment, despite rich and meaningful instruction at the CORE and TARGETED levels, slows to below State-approved, grade-level standards. INTENSIVE support is distinguished from TARGETED support by intensification of scaffolding, time, expertise and assessment. Additionally, INTENSIVE instruction is typically provided to smaller groups of similarly-skilled and needs-alike students or one-to-one. INTENSIVE instruction usually occurs three to five times per week for 30 to 60 minutes (over a minimum of nine weeks) and is more likely to occur outside the general classroom than the TARGETED level of support. Like TARGETED level support, INTENSIVE support incorporates the currently-adopted content standards and objectives and utilizes the principles of scaffolding, accelerating, enriching and differentiating to provide instruction that is relevant and engaging to the student and is meaningfully aligned to what is happening in the general education environment. Collaboration continues to be a key component to making this level of support effective and meaningful. SPL endorses four factors as significantly contributing to highly effective INTENSIVE support as follows: 1) the teacher plays a critical role in assessment and instruction; 2) the teacher uses a different method of delivery than the student has previously received; 3) the instruction is engaging and developmentally appropriate; 4) the instruction includes significant opportunities for authentic, integrated reading, writing, language, speaking, listening and problem-solving. SPL does not promote isolated skill drill requiring students to independently make connections and generalizations to the CORE content. INTENSIVE support is most effective when provided by expert teachers including, but not necessarily limited to, interventionists, special educators, instructional coaches, Title 1 teachers and specialists. Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 7

16 Because of the urgency at this level, the response to INTENSIVE level support is formally monitored every one to two weeks and continually monitored using formative assessment processes. Assessment provides information on how to meet the student s instructional and/or behavioral needs and assists the teacher in developing meaningful feedback for students. A variety of reliable assessments are available to monitor student needs. More formal diagnostic assessments may be given to get a comprehensive look at the student s strengths and areas of need. (Appendix B, C, F, G, H and I) If a student is unable to progress to the TARGETED or CORE level after reasonable duration of high-quality support at the INTENSIVE level, decisions driven by useful and relevant assessment data are reviewed and discussed by the school team. Recommendations and/or referrals are made after careful consideration of a collection of relevant data collected over time. Like assessment at the TARGETED level, the assessment system used at the INTENSIVE level is relevant, balanced and may vary from student to student. If a special education evaluation is being considered for the student, it is advisable for the teacher to meet with the school psychologist prior to beginning the process to identify necessary documentation and/or data to be collected during INTENSIVE support/instruction. The table below has suggested guidelines for the SPL framework. Table: Suggested SPL Guidelines Variables Targeted Instruction Intensive Instruction Time Per Session minutes minutes Length of Session Time will vary based on student needs 9 weeks minimum prior to moving to Intensive Continues only until specific skill, concept, behavior is in place (usually short-term) 9 weeks minimum Number of Sessions 3-5 per week 3-5 per week Frequency of Progress Monitoring Every 2-3 weeks Every 1-2 weeks 8 Specific Learning Disabilities

17 Determining Levels of Support through Problem-Solving The school must establish a process for examining screening data, analyzing causes for limited response to CORE instruction, developing instruction to increase student achievement and ensuring all students are learning. The process of decision-making is the same regardless of examining groups of students or an individual student. The more efficient use of time and resources is found when the process is utilized to benefit groups of students. The SPL team members will have various roles in this process. It is a continuous cycle of examining data and modifying and adjusting for student needs. This collaborative learning cycle results in curriculum decisions, scheduling of instruction, student grouping and allocation of resources. Five steps in the process have been identified. The steps are as follows: 1. Identify & Define Needs 2. Analyze the Problem 5. Evaluate & Adjust the Plan 3. Develop a Plan 1. Identify and Define Needs 4. Implement & Monitor the Plan The student s academic or behavioral need is explained in objective, measurable terms. Both the student and the learning environments are analyzed through data collection (e.g., screening, classroom walk-throughs, observations). The match or mismatch between the learner and his or her learning environment is described. 2. Analyze the Problem The goal of problem analysis is to determine why this problem is occurring. Additional data are collected on the specific academic and/or behavioral need noted in the problem description. Data must be collected over a period of time and must be representative of the student s typical academic performance and/or behavior in the learning environment. Data collection procedures must be reliable, designed for individual student assessment and allow for repeated measurement of the same skills or behavior over time. The data must be used to analyze the problem and explore specific evidence-based instruction to address the need. Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 9

18 3. Develop a Plan An individual student instructional plan must be designed by using the data collected over time. The instructional goal(s) for the plan must be established and describe the instruction to be provided. A progress monitoring plan should be included with persons responsible for implementation and projected timelines. 4. Implement and Monitor the Plan The plan is monitored for the integrity of implementation. Progress monitoring refers to a systematic, frequent collection of individual performance data. The measures are repeated over time and charted for documentation purposes. 5. Evaluate and Adjust the Plan Evaluate the effectiveness of the instruction provided by comparing the student s initial level of performance to performance results achieved as a result of implementing the instructional plan. If the instruction is not producing the desired results, adjust the instructional plan based on the data. Progress Monitoring Progress monitoring plays a critical role in a SPL approach and SLD Identification. Progress monitoring serves as a tool for accurately and efficiently determining the benefit of instruction. Progress monitoring is a scientifically based practice used to assess students academic performance and evaluate the effectiveness of instruction (National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, 2009). Student progress in academic areas such as reading, writing and mathematics can be measured with both commercial progress monitoring tools as well as curriculumbased measurement (CBM) procedures. Progress monitoring provides dynamic assessment information to help teachers make instructional decisions. Frequently collected data provides on-going guidance to teachers regarding the effectiveness of instruction and whether changes to instruction are needed. In other words, if differentiated and scaffolded instruction is not improving the student s progress, changes should be made. While progress monitoring data are collected prior to and during the referral and evaluation process (every two to three weeks in TARGETED and every one to two weeks in INTENSIVE), it is important that school personnel involved at various decision-making levels (i.e., IT, SAT, MDET, EC) understand the purpose and utility of progress monitoring procedures. A consistent monitoring plan is essential to determine effectiveness of instructional programs. Movement of a student within the instructional levels is determined by the data collected through progress monitoring. Progress monitoring is the way in which a team can gather the data used to make decisions during the problem-solving process. Progress monitoring varies depending on the level of intensity. For students at the CORE level, progress monitoring is provided to all students using on-going universal screening and assessments aligned with instruction. Students who are receiving more intensive instruction in TARGETED and INTENSIVE levels are provided more focused progress monitoring. Tools that are flexible, efficient, accessible and informative are a priority. Progress monitoring assessments function within SPL as a gauge of student performance and bring forward the need for conversation about instruction for groups of students or for individuals. Assessments in this category most typically target evidence of progress relative to specific, high-priority skills and processes. Data in this category could come from Acuity testlets or probes, DIBELS Next, West Virginia Writes, as well as other assessments. Progress monitoring assessment results can be used to adjust scaffolding, instructional pacing and presentation, as well as contribute to a collection of data used to make decisions about most appropriate instruction and placement for individual students. 10 Specific Learning Disabilities

19 Progress monitoring is based on the following tenets: 1. The general education classroom is meeting the needs of students as evidenced by acceptable academic growth for most students 2. Important differences exist between a student targeted for instruction and his/her peers 3. Inadequate growth occurs for some targeted students even when general education instruction is adjusted 4. Improved growth can occur for students identified for special education services (Fuchs, Fuchs, & Speece, 2002) The most important goals of progress monitoring are: 1) determining if students are making progress toward specific skills, processes or understandings; and, 2) informing school-wide action plans. When instruction is implemented and students scores increase, students are profiting from the instruction. When students scores are flat, indicating no or little improvement, the first decision must be to change the instruction as the current instruction is not beneficial. Progress monitoring data provides valuable information about students improvement as a result of a particular instructional method or program and measures instructional change and student growth. An important aspect of progress monitoring is the establishment of measurable goals. Systematically sampling the various skills that comprise the curriculum at a particular grade level characterize the student s overall competence related to the State-approved, grade-level standards within an academic area. By graphing a student s scores and drawing a line to connect the scores, this trend line is used to illustrate the rate at which the student is making progress toward mastering grade-level curriculum. Scores are used to analyze student performance in relation to State-approved, grade-level standards. The student s average increase per week (i.e., rate of improvement or slope) is calculated to quantify his/her rate of learning on a particular skill. On the basis of slope, decisions are made about the adequacy of progress. Goal setting, then, plays a critical role in the problem-solving process. Goal Setting 1. Collect three or four baseline data points (on consecutive days or in one day, depending on the student s attention). 2. Write a modest, reasonable or ambitious goal based on the student s learning characteristics. Goals are written in measurable terms such as: In 24 weeks (end-of-year goal written after the first 12 weeks of school), Andrew will read aloud 100 words in 1 minute. 3. After setting the student s goal, administer timed reading assessments every two to three weeks or more often if warranted. 4. After 3-4 weeks of intervention, analyze the student s graph to determine the student s progress. Two options must be addressed: a. If the trend of performance is below the projected rate of progress (i.e., the goal line), adjust the instruction in an effort to cause a change. b. If the trend of performance is above the projected rate of progress, raise the goal. Appendix E provides additional information on goal setting in the area of reading. Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts 11

20 The use of charting rules allows teachers to problem solve and determine more effective instruction throughout the course of the nine-week instructional period. It is not appropriate to assume that even strong instruction will be effective for all students, and this individualized approach to examining the data will assist teachers and teams in making beneficial instructional decisions for each student who struggles. For a step-by-step guide on using CBM procedures, see Advanced Applications of CBM in Reading (K- 6): Instructional Decision-Making Strategies Manual by Pamela Stecker and Erica Lembke at studentprogress.org/weblibrary.asp#cbm_class. Comprehensive information on progress monitoring is collected and disseminated by the National Center on Student Progress Monitoring at Included on the web site are presentations, procedures manuals, information briefs and training modules. An important responsibility of the Instruction Team (IT) is to review the results of universal screening/interim data (e.g., DIBELS Next, Acuity, AIMSweb, STAR) administered at a particular grade-level and/or content level. ITs should meet after each universal screening or Interim administration to determine which students require additional support. Once these students are identified and assigned to instructional groups that address specific needs, progress monitoring data should be reviewed every two to three weeks. For example, when DIBELS Next data are used, the team reviews the percentage of students at each instructional recommendation: benchmark, strategic or intensive. The team uses the data to set measurable goals to achieve by the next interim assessment. After reviewing the students current performance and setting goals for the next interim assessment, the team brainstorms whole-class instructional strategies and/or research-based materials that could be used to improve individual student performance in the general education classroom. Problem-Solving and Teaming: Prerequisites to Identification of SLD Decisions at all levels of the SPL process are fundamentally dependent on school collaborative problem-solving teams. Both informal and formal collaborative structures for decision-making are in place in West Virginia and include: School Leadership Teams, Grade-Level Teams, Content Area Teams, Instruction Teams (IT), Student Assistance Teams (SAT), Multidisciplinary Evaluation Teams (MDET), Eligibility Committees (EC) and Individualized Education Program (IEP) Teams. Each of these formats provides a framework and process for discussing students educational concerns and ultimately informs the SPL process for determining SLD. West Virginia Board of Education Policy 2510, Assuring Quality of Education: Regulations for Education Programs, sets forth requirements at each programmatic level to address the needs of struggling students. In Grades K-4 schools must provide strategies for early detection and intervention to correct student deficiencies in reading, language arts and mathematics. At the middle school level, an intervention component ensures mastery of the rigorous content standards and objectives at each grade-level. High school students who do not demonstrate mastery of the content standards and objectives shall be provided extra help and extra time through intervention strategies. 12 Specific Learning Disabilities

Support for Personalized Learning Guidance for West Virginia Schools and Districts April 2012 West Virginia Board of Education 2011-2012 L. Wade Linger Jr., President Gayle C. Manchin, Vice President Robert

SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITY 24:05:24.01:18. Specific learning disability defined. Specific learning disability is a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding

Frequently Asked Questions about Making Specific Learning Disability (SLD) Eligibility Decisions This document is part of the department s guidance on implementing Wisconsin SLD criteria. It provides answers

Spring School Psychologist RTI² Training Q &A Clarification on the use of the Gap Analysis Worksheet: As part of the RTI² decision making process, teams meet to review a student s rate of improvement to

Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses Standards and Procedures for Identification of Students with Suspected Specific Learning Disabilities March, 2010 Table of Contents Patterns of Strengths and Weaknesses

12 Section Two: Ohio Standards for the Teaching Profession 1 Teachers understand student learning and development and respect the diversity of the students they teach. Teachers display knowledge of how

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE S The Framework of Supports are a set of Practice Profiles that serve as an implementation overview of Support for Personalized Learning (SPL). Practice

GUIDELINES FOR THE IEP TEAM DATA COLLECTION & Progress Monitoring Decisions about the effectiveness of an intervention must be based on data, not guesswork. Frequent, repeated measures of progress toward

The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support Chapter 1: Massachusetts Tiered System of Support (MTSS) Overview Massachusetts has developed a blueprint outlining a single system of supports that is responsive

National(Association(of(Pediatric(Nurse(Practitioners,(April(2013 EDUCATION RELATED EDUCATIONAL INTERVENTION: EVALUATION, EDUCATION AND THE LAW Once a pediatric healthcare provider recommends that a child

Transcript: What Is Progress Monitoring? Slide 1: Welcome to the webinar, What Is Progress Monitoring? This is one of 11 webinars developed by the National Center on Response to Intervention (NCRTI). This

Greenwood Public School District Dr. Montrell Greene, Superintendent Dr. June Leigh, Director of Curriculum 2015-2016 Instructional Management Plan Greenwood Public School District Academic Education Department

Eligibility / Staffing Determination EMOTIONAL DISTURBANCE Date of Meeting: Student Name: DOB: Soc. Sec.#: The basis for making the determination of whether the student has a disability which meets the

Curriculum and Instruction Core curriculum is the foundation of Tier 1 instruction and is the basis for building K-12 literacy in Arizona students. The curriculum at each level must be based upon the 2010

2014-15 Response to Intervention/ Student Support Team Manual Department of Psychological Services Preface One of the primary objectives of Psychological Services is to provide supportive assistance to

Response to Intervention Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 1. What is at the heart of RtI? The purpose of RtI is to provide all students with the best opportunities to succeed in school, identify students

Chapter 2 - Why RTI Plays An Important Role in the Determination of Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) under IDEA 2004 How Does IDEA 2004 Define a Specific Learning Disability? IDEA 2004 continues to

Understanding the Standards-based Individualized Education Program (IEP) Many states and local school districts are embracing a new approach to developing Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for students

21ST CENTURY TEACHING AND LEARNING 21st Century Teaching and Learning Dr. Grace Surdovel, Director of Master's Programs/Faculty of Practice The Master of Science in Education with a major in 21st Century

Hand in Hand Guidance for West Virginia Parents Office of Special Programs West Virginia Department of Education March, 2013 West Virginia Board of Education 2013-2014 Gayle C. Manchin, President Michael

Uinta County School District #1 Multi Tier System of Supports Guidance Document The purpose of this document is to provide an overview of Multi Tier System of Supports (MTSS) framework and its essential

NEW TSPC SPECIALIZATION: AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDER 1. What is a TSPC "Specialization"? Q and A May 24, 2012 This is a new specialization on a license now offered by TSPC. The first TSPC "specialization"

Principal Performance Review Office of School Quality Division of Teaching and Learning Principal Practice Observation Tool 2014-15 The was created as an evidence gathering tool to be used by evaluators

I. DEFINITION "Specific learning disability" means a disorder in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself

Position Statement IDENTIFICATION OF STUDENTS WITH SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES NASP endorses the provision of effective services to help children and youth succeed academically, socially, behaviorally,

Model for Practitioner Evaluation Manual SCHOOL COUNSELOR Approved by Board of Education August 28, 2002 Revised August 2008 Model for Practitioner Evaluation Guidelines and Process for Traditional Evaluation

NEW YORK STATE TEACHER CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONS TEST DESIGN AND FRAMEWORK September 2014 Authorized for Distribution by the New York State Education Department This test design and framework document

. EDAM EDAM-5001. EARLY LITERACY: GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND LANGUAGE DEVELOPMENT This course is the prerequisite for all other courses in the Early Childhood Literacy program. It outlines the philosophical

Teacher Evaluation Missouri s Educator Evaluation System Teacher Evaluation Protocol Introduction Missouri s Educator Evaluation System was created and refined by hundreds of educators across the state.

NASET LD Report #5 The Importance of Response to Intervention (RTI) in the Understanding, Assessment, Diagnosis, and Teaching of Students Overview of Response to Intervention (RTI) The Response to Intervention

SPECIAL EDUCATION IN NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota Department of Public Instruction Kirsten Baesler, State Superintendent Office of Special Education 600 E. Boulevard Ave., Dept. 201 Bismarck ND 58505-0440

AZ Response to Intervention (RTI) Elementary Technical Assistance Paper Purpose... 2 What is Response to Intervention?... 2 Why Use the Response to Intervention Model?... 3 How Should the Three Intervention

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education Professional Development Self- Assessment Guidebook For Teacher Professional Development Offerings Modified for use by the District and School

CURRICULUM AND PLANNING STANDARD (CP): The Special Education teacher makes decisions about planning that demonstrate an understanding of grade level content knowledge, specialized that addresses students

Special Education Student Services Special Education Program Descriptions 2016-17 Bethlehem Central School District 700 Delaware Avenue, Delmar, New York 12054 Introduction This document provides descriptions

MASTER OF ARTS IN EDUCATION The Master of Arts in Education degree program combines online learning with practical and applied learning in the classroom. The master s candidate must earn and successfully

Using CBM to Progress Monitor English Language Learners Webinar Provided for National Center on Student Progress Monitoring Laura M. Sáenz, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Special Education at UT-Pan American

Implementing RTI Using Title I, Title III, and CEIS Funds Key Issues for Decision-makers U.S. Department of Education 1 As Response to Intervention, or RTI expands across the country, the question we at

STANDARD I: ELEMENT A: Teachers demonstrate leadership Teachers lead in their classroom Developing Has assessment data available and refers to it to understand the skills and abilities of students Accesses

DEPARTMENT OF CURRICULUM & INSTRUCTION FRAMEWORK PROLOGUE Paterson s Department of Curriculum and Instruction was recreated in 2005-2006 to align the preschool through grade 12 program and to standardize

Catholic Conference of Ohio Q&A DOCUMENT TO ASSIST PARENTS OF SPECIAL NEEDS CHILDREN AND SERVE AS A RESOURCE FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS ENROLLING CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES 1. What is the Individual Disability

Evaluation Team Report Annotations for the New ETR PR-06 Form The purpose of an evaluation under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is to determine whether a child is a child with a

BUILDING A COMMUNITY OF R E A D I N G E X P E RT S Tips for Designing a High Quality Professional Development Program PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT. A critical component of Reading First is a strategic, systematic

The Role of the School Psychologist in the RTI Process - The Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI) process is a multi-tiered approach to providing services and interventions to struggling learners at increasing

Annual Report on Curriculum, Instruction, and Student Achievement Independent School District 700, Hermantown Community Schools Information for the constituents of the Hermantown School District of curriculum,

Teacher Rubric with Suggested Teacher and Student Look-fors This document is intended to inform school communities in recognizing the performance levels for key elements defined in the Teacher Rubric and

Kansas Multi-Tier System of Support MTSS is a coherent continuum of evidence based, system-wide practices to support a rapid response to academic and behavioral needs, with frequent data-based monitoring

New Roles in Response to Intervention: Creating Success for Schools and Children November 2006 A Collaborative Project With: The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) Council of Administrators

St. Matthias IB MYP Special Needs Policy Vision for Inclusion of the Archdiocese of Chicago The heart and spirit of our Archdiocesan Catholic Schools reveals itself in the faith conviction that all God

GIFTED AND TALENTED STANDARDS Standard I. The teacher of gifted and talented students understands and applies knowledge of the historical, legal, and conceptual foundations of gifted education. Standard

REGULATIONS of the BOARD OF REGENTS FOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION K-12 Literacy, Restructuring of the Learning environment at the middle and high school levels, and proficiency based graduation

Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Manual 2014-2015 Adapted from the Flagler County Public School MTSS Manual The Okaloosa County School District would like to thank the following staff members for

14 Del. C. 512(4)-(7) 1. Explain how the school s Board and School Leadership Team will measure and evaluate LTA (LTA) will use multiple data sources to enhance student learning while focusing on the need

Principles to Actions Executive Summary In 1989 the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) launched the standards-based education movement in North America with the release of Curriculum and

Writing Instructionally Appropriate IEPs Special Populations Tennessee Department of Education Sullivan County Teacher Training July 2014 Norms Please sit with your identified group there is a purpose.

Rubric for Evaluating Colorado s Specialized Service Professionals: School Psychologists Definition of an Effective School Psychologist Effective school psychologists are vital members of the education

Key Principles for ELL Instruction (v6) The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in English Language Arts and Mathematics as well as the soon-to-be released Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) require

Progress Monitoring and RTI System What is AIMSweb? Our Reports Provide: AYP/NCLB Risk Category Reporting and rates of progress by type of instructional program or risk group include these demographics

APPENDIX E DOMAIN A: PURPOSEFUL PLANNING 1. Utilizing Student, School, and Community Data to Plan. The school social worker does not monitor academic achievement. The social worker rarely or never uses

Curriculum Development, Revision, and Evaluation Processes Connections Education has substantial resources for curriculum development and instructional support. The company s team of talented, experienced

School of Education MASTER OF SCIENCE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION Master of Science in Special Education 2012-2014 Master of Science in Special Education Master of Science in Special Education Purpose The Master

Standards for Professional Development APRIL 2015 Ohio Standards for Professional Development April 2015 Page 1 Introduction All of Ohio s educators and parents share the same goal that Ohio s students

Foundation Paper Supporting Special Education Students with READ 180 READ 180 is a scientifically research-based, intensive reading intervention program with a proven track record of delivering measurable